Ard: First, Lefi has clarified the request. This patch doesn't need to catch the stable tag.
Second, I plan to wait 1~2 days to collect the feedback, the merge the changes. I want to avoid revert change. I don't mean to merge them, then immediately create the stable tag. Sorry if I bring confuse to you. Last, on current plan https://edk2.groups.io/g/devel/message/60474, I will merge two patches tomorrow (06-02), then create the stable tag (06-03). Thanks Liming > -----Original Message----- > From: devel@edk2.groups.io <devel@edk2.groups.io> On Behalf Of Ard Biesheuvel > Sent: Monday, June 1, 2020 6:32 PM > To: Gao, Liming <liming....@intel.com>; devel@edk2.groups.io; > ler...@redhat.com; Leif Lindholm <l...@nuviainc.com> > Cc: phi...@redhat.com; mli...@suse.cz; Kinney, Michael D > <michael.d.kin...@intel.com>; af...@apple.com > Subject: Re: [edk2-devel] [PATCH] MdePkg/Include: AARCH64: disable outline > atomics on GCC 10.2+ > > On 5/30/20 5:10 PM, Gao, Liming wrote: > > Ard: > > Lefi requests to catch this change into 202005 stable tag. I also > > highlight this request in hard feature freeze notice mail > https://edk2.groups.io/g/devel/message/60421. > > > > If no objection before the middle of next week (2020-06-03), this patch > > can be merged with the updated comments. > > > > If the intent is to allow things to stabilize a bit with this patch > applied, before creating the tag, then the patch should be pushed > earlier, no? > > Then, we give it a few days so that we can revert it again if anyone > finds any issues with it. > > Pushing it right before creating the tag does not sound to me like the > correct way to approach this. > > > > >> -----Original Message----- > >> From: devel@edk2.groups.io <devel@edk2.groups.io> On Behalf Of Ard > >> Biesheuvel > >> Sent: Saturday, May 30, 2020 12:51 AM > >> To: Gao, Liming <liming....@intel.com>; devel@edk2.groups.io; > >> ler...@redhat.com; Leif Lindholm <l...@nuviainc.com> > >> Cc: phi...@redhat.com; mli...@suse.cz; Kinney, Michael D > >> <michael.d.kin...@intel.com>; af...@apple.com > >> Subject: Re: [edk2-devel] [PATCH] MdePkg/Include: AARCH64: disable outline > >> atomics on GCC 10.2+ > >> > >> On 5/29/20 4:29 PM, Gao, Liming wrote: > >>> Ard: > >>> > >>>> -----Original Message----- > >>>> From: devel@edk2.groups.io <devel@edk2.groups.io> On Behalf Of Ard > >>>> Biesheuvel > >>>> Sent: Friday, May 29, 2020 1:47 PM > >>>> To: devel@edk2.groups.io; Gao, Liming <liming....@intel.com>; > >>>> ler...@redhat.com; Leif Lindholm <l...@nuviainc.com> > >>>> Cc: phi...@redhat.com; mli...@suse.cz > >>>> Subject: Re: [edk2-devel] [PATCH] MdePkg/Include: AARCH64: disable > >>>> outline atomics on GCC 10.2+ > >>>> > >>>> On 5/29/20 5:18 AM, Liming Gao via groups.io wrote: > >>>>> Leif: > >>>>> I get the point that the linux distribution default GCC version may > >>>>> be 10 or above. Without this fix, those developers can’t > pass > >>>> build edk2-stable202005. So, you think this is a critical issue to catch > >>>> stable tag 202005. > >>>>> > >>>>> Ard: > >>>>> For this patch, I have two minor comments. > >>>>> 1) I suggest to remove Link: > >>>>> https://bugzilla.tianocore.org/show_bug.cgi?id=2723 from comments, > >>>>> because this information has > >>>> been in the commit message. > >>>> > >>>> I think it would be helpful to keep it but I won't insist. > >>>> > >>> > >>> I agree this is useful. But, we record it in the commit message. I prefer > >>> to remove this link from source code. > >>> With this change, Reviewed-by: Liming Gao <liming....@intel.com> > >>> > >> > >> > >> Works for me. > >> > >> I will send a v2 after the stable tag is released. > >> > >> > >>>>> 2) Can we think __GNUC_MINOR__ is always defined? Do we need to check > >>>>> its value after check whether it is defined or not? > >>>>> > >>>> > >>>> Yes __GNUC_MINOR__ is always defined. > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>>> -----Original Message----- > >>>>> From: devel@edk2.groups.io <devel@edk2.groups.io> On Behalf Of Laszlo > >>>>> Ersek > >>>>> Sent: 2020年5月29日 4:03 > >>>>> To: Leif Lindholm <l...@nuviainc.com> > >>>>> Cc: Ard Biesheuvel <ard.biesheu...@arm.com>; devel@edk2.groups.io; Gao, > >>>>> Liming <liming....@intel.com>; > phi...@redhat.com; > >>>> mli...@suse.cz > >>>>> Subject: Re: [edk2-devel] [PATCH] MdePkg/Include: AARCH64: disable > >>>>> outline atomics on GCC 10.2+ > >>>>> > >>>>> On 05/28/20 12:05, Leif Lindholm wrote: > >>>>>> On Wed, May 27, 2020 at 11:12:23 +0200, Laszlo Ersek wrote: > >>>>>>>>>> Oh and I think both this patch and the assembly language > >>>>>>>>>> implementation for the atomics should be delayed after the stable > >>>>>>>>>> tag. gcc-10 is a new toolchain; so even if we don't introduce a > >>>>>>>>>> new toolchain tag such as > >>>>>>>>>> GCC10 for it, whatever we do in order to make it work, that's > >>>>>>>>>> feature enablement in my book. > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> Works for me. By the time the next stable tag comes around, early > >>>>>>>>> adopters that are now on GCC 10.1 will likely have moved to 10.2 by > >>>>>>>>> that time, and so we may not need the assembly patch at all. > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> I'm not ecstatic that we'll be releasing the first stable tag known > >>>>>>>> to break with current toolchains. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> If this breakage affects "current toolchains", then why was > >>>>>>> <https://bugzilla.tianocore.org/show_bug.cgi?id=2723> only reported > >>>>>>> on 2020-May-19, four days into the soft feature freeze? > >>>>>> > >>>>>> I agree the timing is crap. > >>>>>> > >>>>>>>> This isn't just affecting random crazies pulling latest toolchains > >>>>>>>> down, but people using their distro defaults (native or cross). > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> ... "people using their distro defaults" to *not* build upstream edk2 > >>>>>>> until 2020-May-19, apparently. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Or distro defaults changing in between. I mean, we could say "Arch is > >>>>>> the same as any other distro's unstable", but I wouldn't want to go > >>>>>> down that route - I know people who use it for developing also for > >>>>>> qemu and linux. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Argh, I also just realised the error report I saw two days after Ard's > >>>>>> intrinsics patch hit the list was not a public report. Yes, if this > >>>>>> had affected only in-development/unstable distributions, I agree this > >>>>>> isn't something we should try to deal with upstream. > >>>>>> > >>>>>>>> I don't recall if 10.1 ended up being default in F32, but it was > >>>>>>>> definitely included. In Arch, it does appear default. > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> Debian/Ubuntu are unaffected in their stable releases. > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> I agree it's a transitional issue, but I would really prefer to have > >>>>>>>> the intrinsics included in the release. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> OK, let's delay the release then, by a few days. I agree the present > >>>>>>> patch may qualify as a bugfix, but the other patch with the assembly > >>>>>>> language intrinsics doesn't. If it's really that important to have in > >>>>>>> the upcoming stable tag, then it's worth delaying the tag for. I'm > >>>>>>> fine delaying the release for it; it wouldn't be without precedent. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> I would argue it *is* a bugfix, since it only has an effect on builds > >>>>>> that would otherwise fail. > >>>>> > >>>>> OK. That's a good argument. From my POV, feel free to merge (both > >>>>> patches). > >>>>> > >>>>> Thanks > >>>>> Laszlo > >>>>> > >>>>>> But I also do think it is important enough to delay the release if we > >>>>>> feel that is necessary. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> / > >>>>>> Leif > >>>>>> > >>>>>>> Also, I think Ard's assembly language patch needs a Tested-by from > >>>>>>> Gary at the least (reporter of TianoCore#2723). Please reach out to > >>>>>>> him in that thread. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> ... More precisely, please *ping* Gary for a Tested-by in that > >>>>>>> thread, because Ard CC'd him from the start, and even credited Gary > >>>>>>> in the commit message. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> Thanks, > >>>>>>> Laszlo > >>>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>> > >> > >> > >> > > > > > -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Groups.io Links: You receive all messages sent to this group. View/Reply Online (#60522): https://edk2.groups.io/g/devel/message/60522 Mute This Topic: https://groups.io/mt/74396053/21656 Group Owner: devel+ow...@edk2.groups.io Unsubscribe: https://edk2.groups.io/g/devel/unsub [arch...@mail-archive.com] -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-